Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Recommended Posts

 

Quote

 

Camping Setbacks

Water – The State of Arizona has a law prohibiting anyone from camping within 1/4 mile of a body of water (lakes, rivers, et al) or from a livestock watering container. This law is published under Arizona Revised Statute, Title 17 Fish & Game. (Reference, ARS § 17-308 Unlawful camping)

 

So, what was their thinking when this was passed? How does this work for claims?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sky isn't falling. Read the actual law rather than relying on some hippie website interpretation. This law only applies to natural water holes or man made watering facilities containing water (not a "body of water" and not "lakes, rivers and others"). It only applies when the water is the only reasonably available water for wildlife or domestic stock. It only applies when your camping location will deny those critters access to the water. Common sense thinking only and not a blanket prohibition on camping within 1/4 mile of water.

Here is the actual law:

 

17-308. Unlawful camping

It is unlawful for a person to camp within one-fourth mile of a natural water hole containing water or a man-made watering facility containing water in such a place that wildlife or domestic stock will be denied access to the only reasonably available water.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was done so the animals would be able to drink water.

Been that way for as long as I can remember.

Tom H. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the same as Nevada law. Critters need to be able to drink!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a shame to me that people have to be told this. Serious outdoorsmen imbibe this with mama's milk. Not to mention that by blocking access to water, you are putting yourself in danger from predators of all kinds.

Jim

  • well done 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't camp on a cattle tank for obvious reasons. And the same with springs in the desert. That is what the law prohibits. 

They don't want camping around water in a lot of places because people crap all over the place and it gets in the water. They wind up dumping a lot of other stuff when they camp too. And people flock to the water on weekends. Stream banks are really impacted by campers.

Any established camping area is generally well away from water. The ones that are near water usually have toilet facilities and trash receptacles and management that cleans things up.

I don't think it is unethical for an individual to camp a night on the creek primitive style. But to take a family out for a weekend of camping on a creek is another story. That type of chaos is best kept up on the hill away from the water unless it is within an established campground.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2021 at 9:30 AM, clay said:
Quote

The sky isn't falling. Read the actual law rather than relying on some hippie website interpretation.

 

I read the ACTUAL LAW. I asked a couple SIMPLE ass questions and you respond with your garbage.

1. What was their thinking when this was passed?

2. How does this work for claims?

I ran across some govt signs posted at club claims prohibiting any and all camping, so I got curious and came home and RESEARCHED. Came across the actual law and then came here for some additional insight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You did not post the actual law - you posted some internet crap that didn't in any way match what the law is. That's why I posted the actual law.

If you want to know what the legislature was thinking when they passed a law to insure wildlife and livestock could drink without being blocked by people recreating you will need to read the debate and leg law created. It seems others here have given you a good overview the these common sense rules and why they would be observed by any experienced outdoors person whether there was a law or not.

Camping does not work for claims. Camping is a recreational activity that is heavily regulated - as is all recreational activity on public lands. Whether you, or anyone else, can camp on a claim is subject to the recreational rules and regulations that have been created by the surface management authority. No claimant has a right to camp on their claim because camping is a recreational activity - the right to mine is not associated in any way with the privilege of public recreation.

Claim owners have a right and duty to occupy their mining claims. Mining and occupation of a mining claim is not subject to recreational camping restrictions. Since you are visiting club claims you are subject to any club rules about members camping on claims, as a member you are not a claim owner with mining rights.

I know from experience you will cry foul and claim anyone who tries to educate you is full of various offensive phrases. I write what I write here for all those forum members who have a genuine interest in learning about this subject. Many will question what I wrote about camping on mining claims. For those who wish to learn I offer this published official (Federal Register November 6, 2008) final rule from the Forest Service about camping restrictions on mining claims.

Quote

Regardless of the local stay limit... reasonably incidental residential use of NFS lands by persons conducting locatable mineral prospecting, exploration, mining, or processing that will not cause significant disturbance of NFS surface resources does not require prior submission of a notice of intent to conduct operations or approval of a plan of operations.


Educate yourself and prosper - or not. The choice, as always, is yours.

Edited by clay
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2021 at 12:57 PM, clay said:

Claim owners have a right and duty to occupy their mining claims. Mining and occupation of a mining claim is not subject to recreational camping restrictions. Since you are visiting club claims you are subject to any club rules about members camping on claims, as a member you are not a claim owner with mining rights.

These were GOVERNMENT signs posted ON club claims, not club made signs. 

What is f#@%ing hilarious; is that these laws do not apply to areas that are easily monetized, policed and patrolled for forced compliance! i.e. Lake Pleasant, Lynx Lake and all the other bodies of water and their tributaries ... so YES, the sky IS falling ...  

I did read the AZ state law. I was looking for more insight/information. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

A little different than the original post, but found this sign closing camping on a place I’d stayed at a month before.  I certainly hope this isn’t turning into a trend throughout AZ.

E7F5225D-4996-45C8-9789-840D5A6275B1.jpeg

This area had dozens of campsites just off the road.  To me it did not seem people were abusing these or turning them into long term residences.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Clay—Probably should have opened my own post on this and put this in outings perhaps.  Do you know what the Arizona State equivalent of the BLM’s Travel Management Plan?  There was other official sign I wished I’d gotten a picturef that sites dust abatement as a reason for not pulling off the road.  Looks like some of these sites may have been bulldozed which loosened up the desert pavement that had built up over the years and left dust.

This is North of 74, along New RIver road.  I think the turn off is 162 Av, but is located here 33°51'14.5"N 112°12'12.8"W.

I could see someone not wanting dozens of off road vehicles blazing down these unofficial trails, but on some federal lands, there are areas designated on maps for camping by the road.  Part of what I will look up when I get home is the state rules for camping on state trust land.

I hope these signs going up do not effect areas like Jackass Flats.  At this particular area, the state had paid to put up these signs at every single one of these campsites.

I have not done any research on this since I’m Boondocking right now, and I want to look at this over the next week.

With this being state land being shut down to motorized vehicles meaning don’t pull your travel trailer off the road on state trust land for camping.  This area is about 20 or 30 miles from Jackass flat.  Jackass Flats is the East side of the carefree highway, and this is the west side of the carefree highway.  Just like there are official trails throughout public lands, my issue is the campsites that have sprung up over the decades, like the ones used for the Bill’s bi-annual Nuggetshooter get together being shut down.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2021 at 8:49 AM, clay said:

That's Arizona State Land Chris, no mining claims there.

Interestingly the sign cites State laws against trespassing. Nothing about motor vehicles or camping in those laws.

 

37-501Trespass on state lands; classification
https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/ars/37/00501.htm

13-1502Criminal trespass in the third degree; classification
https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/01502.htm

37-502Damages in civil action for trespass on state lands; seizure of products; report of trespasses
https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/ars/37/00502.htm



the web address on the sign dumps you to https://asld.secure.force.com/recreationalpermit/

 

On 4/29/2021 at 9:33 AM, Electrician said:

What is f#@%ing hilarious; is that these laws do not apply to areas that are easily monetized, policed and patrolled for forced compliance! i.e. Lake Pleasant, Lynx Lake and all the other bodies of water and their tributaries ... so YES, the sky IS falling ... 

EASILY MONETIZED, POLICED and PATROLLED for FORCED compliance ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2021 at 9:39 AM, chrisski said:

Clay—Probably should have opened my own post on this and put this in outings perhaps.  Do you know what the Arizona State equivalent of the BLM’s Travel Management Plan?  There was other official sign I wished I’d gotten a picturef that sites dust abatement as a reason for not pulling off the road.  Looks like some of these sites may have been bulldozed which loosened up the desert pavement that had built up over the years and left dust.

This is North of 74, along New RIver road.  I think the turn off is 162 Av, but is located here 33°51'14.5"N 112°12'12.8"W.

I could see someone not wanting dozens of off road vehicles blazing down these unofficial trails, but on some federal lands, there are areas designated on maps for camping by the road.  Part of what I will look up when I get home is the state rules for camping on state trust land.

I hope these signs going up do not effect areas like Jackass Flats.  At this particular area, the state had paid to put up these signs at every single one of these campsites.

I have not done any research on this since I’m Boondocking right now, and I want to look at this over the next week.

With this being state land being shut down to motorized vehicles meaning don’t pull your travel trailer off the road on state trust land for camping.  This area is about 20 or 30 miles from Jackass flat.  Jackass Flats is the East side of the carefree highway, and this is the west side of the carefree highway.  Just like there are official trails throughout public lands, my issue is the campsites that have sprung up over the decades, like the ones used for the Bill’s bi-annual Nuggetshooter get together being shut down.

I can't tell you what the State Trust's plans are Chris. I doubt they will share those plans with the public before they carry them out. Jackass Flats is popular and a good camping spot but there are others nearby. It would change the San Domingo area to have Jackass flats closed and I'm sure some of the many new home owners out there would like to see it closed. My opinion, the homeowners opinion and others don't matter much to the State Trusts.

Most people mistake State Trust Lands to be Public Lands. In all respects State Trust Land belongs to the 13 trusts - not the State of Arizona and not the people of Arizona. This makes State Trust Lands the same as private land a far as property management is concerned. The general public have no right to use these lands without permission.

The only "plan" the State Trusts are subject to is their obligation to fund the specific trust any particular piece of trust land belongs too. Recreation, grazing, farming, mining, timber and land sales/leases fund these trusts and the trust can do what it likes to generate income from that land.

The area of your concern east of the lake belongs to the Common Schools Trust. It is leased for grazing and in the recent past has been leased for mining. The Common Schools Trust may have arranged another lease that requires restricting that land from recreational use during the lease period.

These State Trusts can shut down any area they own to recreation, they have no obligation to serve the public. The area around Jackass Flats is also part of the Common Schools Trust. It could be closed to camping if it was decided that would benefit the trust. The grazing rights at Jackass Flats are leased by the Common Schools Trust to Rex Maugham until 2026. The minerals there appear to be available currently for lease from the State Trust.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...